Replies

xs>The only conclusion that one can come to unless
you are predisposed to believe in man's tradition
over the Holy Word of G-d is that Y'shua was speaking of himself as the "Rock "
I'm not at all clear why, because Christ is referred to the Rock so many other places, that is held to definitively *rule out* the possibility that somebody else could be a Rock in a lesser sense in Matt 16. That's not hermeneutics. It would be like saying because "fish" is literal in 414 places in the Bible, it cannot be figurative somewhere else.
See above, Xenia...the Greek allows no such linguistic games. Christ Himself calls Peter the Rock. I would not be so bold to assert it myself if it was not there in plain Greek.

44 posted on 06/08/2006 10:52:23 AM MDT by Claud

Y'shua addresses Peter as a pebble , a small rock not unlike any of us.
You need to refer to the Koine Greek for that descernment.

b'shem Y'shua

Y'shua addresses Peter as a pebble , a small rock not unlike any of us. You need to refer to the Koine Greek for that descernment.

Fine me a reputable Greek scholar who puts stock in that distinction and we'll talk.

But in any case, Greek was not the language Christ used to confer this name. John 1:42 states explicitly that "Petros" was a translation to Greek from the Aramaic Cephas. Cephas was the original, according to the infallible word of God.